StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Business Tools
  3. UI Components
  4. Javascript UI Libraries
  5. jQuery vs lodash

jQuery vs lodash

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

jQuery
jQuery
Stacks195.3K
Followers70.6K
Votes6.6K
GitHub Stars59.6K
Forks20.5K
Lodash
Lodash
Stacks10.7K
Followers886
Votes3
GitHub Stars61.3K
Forks7.1K

jQuery vs lodash: What are the differences?

Comparison: jQuery vs. Lodash

jQuery and Lodash are both popular JavaScript libraries used for simplifying and enhancing web development. While they have some similarities, there are key differences that set them apart. Here are the main differences between jQuery and Lodash:

  1. Utility vs. Full-featured Library: jQuery is primarily a utility library that provides a compact set of functions to simplify DOM manipulation, event handling, and AJAX requests. On the other hand, Lodash is a comprehensive utility library that offers a wide range of functions for common programming tasks, including data manipulation, array and object operations, functional programming, and more.

  2. Cross-platform Compatibility: jQuery is designed to work across various web browsers, ensuring consistent behavior across different platforms. Lodash, on the other hand, focuses more on improving the performance and flexibility of JavaScript code, without placing as much emphasis on cross-browser compatibility.

  3. Size and Performance: jQuery is known for its small file size and optimized performance, making it suitable for projects that require lightweight solutions. In contrast, Lodash provides many additional features and functions, which results in a larger file size and potentially slower performance in comparison.

  4. Syntax and Function Names: jQuery often uses a concise and intuitive syntax that is easy to understand and use, especially for beginners. Lodash, on the other hand, employs a more functional and modular approach, using function names inspired by functional programming paradigms.

  5. Community Support and Ecosystem: jQuery has a vast and established community with extensive documentation, tutorials, plugins, and online resources, making it easy to find help and solutions for specific problems. While Lodash also has good community support, its ecosystem might not be as extensive as jQuery's, as it is more focused on utility functions.

  6. Modern JavaScript Features: jQuery is compatible with older versions of JavaScript, providing backward compatibility for legacy projects. In contrast, Lodash leverages modern JavaScript features and ES6+ syntax, offering advanced capabilities like arrow functions, modules, and built-in methods that are not found in the native JavaScript (pre-ES6) or jQuery.

In summary, jQuery is a lightweight utility library focused on DOM manipulation and web development tasks, while Lodash is a comprehensive utility library that offers a wider range of functionalities for JavaScript programming. Understanding the specific requirements of your project will help you determine which library is more suitable for your needs.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on jQuery, Lodash

Malek
Malek

Web developer at Quicktext

Mar 28, 2020

Decided

The project is a web gadget previously made using vanilla script and JQuery, It is a part of the "Quicktext" platform and offers an in-app live & customizable messaging widget. We made that remake with React eco-system and Typescript and we're so far happy with results. We gained tons of TS features, React scaling & re-usabilities capabilities and much more!

What do you think?

244k views244k
Comments
kazi
kazi

CTO at Blubird Interactive Ltd.

Mar 11, 2020

Decided

I've an eCommerce platform building using Laravel, MySQL and jQuery. It's working good and if anyone become interested, I just deploy the entire source cod e in environment / Hosting. This is not a good model of course. Because everyone ask for small or large amount of change and I had to do this. Imagine when there will be 100 separate deploy and I had to manage 100 separate source.
So How do I make my system architecture so that I'll have a core / base source code. To make any any change / update on specific deployment, it will be theme / plugin / extension based . Also if I introduce an API layer then I could handle the Web, Mobile App and POS as well ? Is the API should be part of source code or a individual single API and all the deployment will use that API ?

115k views115k
Comments
Abigail
Abigail

Dec 6, 2019

Decided

Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) provides standard data objects in JSON format for the healthcare industry. Since JSON objects are hierarchical and tree-like, we had a need to defensively 'pluck' fields from our JSON objects and do lots of mapping. We tried jQuery and Underscore and a few other technologies like FHIRPath; but Lodash has been the most well supported, works in the most contexts, has the cleanest syntax, etc. We particularly like the ES6 version of Lodash, where we can import the method names directly, without resorting to * or _ syntax. We got hooked on the 'get' function to defensively pluck fields from objects without crashing our user interface, and have found countless uses for the other lodash functions throughout our apps. Lodash is great for developing and optimizing algorithms.

38.3k views38.3k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

jQuery
jQuery
Lodash
Lodash

jQuery is a cross-platform JavaScript library designed to simplify the client-side scripting of HTML.

A JavaScript utility library delivering consistency, modularity, performance, & extras. It provides utility functions for common programming tasks using the functional programming paradigm.

Statistics
GitHub Stars
59.6K
GitHub Stars
61.3K
GitHub Forks
20.5K
GitHub Forks
7.1K
Stacks
195.3K
Stacks
10.7K
Followers
70.6K
Followers
886
Votes
6.6K
Votes
3
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 1263
    Cross-browser
  • 957
    Dom manipulation
  • 809
    Power
  • 660
    Open source
  • 610
    Plugins
Cons
  • 6
    Large size
  • 5
    Sometimes inconsistent API
  • 5
    Encourages DOM as primary data source
  • 2
    Live events is overly complex feature
Pros
  • 2
    Better than Underscore
  • 1
    Simple
  • 0
    Better that Underscore
Cons
  • 1
    It reduce the performance
Integrations
No integrations available
JavaScript
JavaScript

What are some alternatives to jQuery, Lodash?

AngularJS

AngularJS

AngularJS lets you write client-side web applications as if you had a smarter browser. It lets you use good old HTML (or HAML, Jade and friends!) as your template language and lets you extend HTML’s syntax to express your application’s components clearly and succinctly. It automatically synchronizes data from your UI (view) with your JavaScript objects (model) through 2-way data binding.

React

React

Lots of people use React as the V in MVC. Since React makes no assumptions about the rest of your technology stack, it's easy to try it out on a small feature in an existing project.

Vue.js

Vue.js

It is a library for building interactive web interfaces. It provides data-reactive components with a simple and flexible API.

jQuery UI

jQuery UI

Whether you're building highly interactive web applications or you just need to add a date picker to a form control, jQuery UI is the perfect choice.

Svelte

Svelte

If you've ever built a JavaScript application, the chances are you've encountered – or at least heard of – frameworks like React, Angular, Vue and Ractive. Like Svelte, these tools all share a goal of making it easy to build slick interactive user interfaces. Rather than interpreting your application code at run time, your app is converted into ideal JavaScript at build time. That means you don't pay the performance cost of the framework's abstractions, or incur a penalty when your app first loads.

Underscore

Underscore

A JavaScript library that provides a whole mess of useful functional programming helpers without extending any built-in objects.

Flux

Flux

Flux is the application architecture that Facebook uses for building client-side web applications. It complements React's composable view components by utilizing a unidirectional data flow. It's more of a pattern rather than a formal framework, and you can start using Flux immediately without a lot of new code.

Famo.us

Famo.us

Famo.us is a free and open source JavaScript platform for building mobile apps and desktop experiences. What makes Famo.us unique is its JavaScript rendering engine and 3D physics engine that gives developers the power and tools to build native quality apps and animations using pure JavaScript.

Deno

Deno

It is a secure runtime for JavaScript and TypeScript built with V8, Rust, and Tokio.

Riot

Riot

Riot brings custom tags to all browsers. Think React + Polymer but with enjoyable syntax and a small learning curve.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase